Objective or subjective 'ought'?

Utilitas 22 (1):33-35 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The prescriptive has both an objective and a subjective interpretation. In the objective sense, what one ought to do depends on what is actually true. In the subjective sense it depends on what one believes to be true. Ordinary usage seems to vacillate between these two interpretations. An example (the indecisive terrorist) is used to show that a subjective ought statement can have a determinate truth-value in situations where the corresponding objective ought statement has no truth-value, not even an unknowable one. Therefore the subjective ought is not definable in terms of the objective ought. However, definability in the other direction is not excluded by this argument

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,672

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Nagel on subjective and objective.V. Haksar - 1981 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 24 (March):105-21.
A dilemma for objective act-utilitarianism.Gerald Lang - 2004 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (2):221-239.
Subjective Reasons.Eric Vogelstein - 2012 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (2):239-257.
Subjective rightness.Holly M. Smith - 2010 - Social Philosophy and Policy 27 (2):64-110.
Subjective and objective.Thomas Nagel - 1979 - In Mortal questions. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 207-222.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-02-09

Downloads
198 (#100,224)

6 months
15 (#164,019)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Sven Ove Hansson
Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Reasons and Persons.Joseph Margolis - 1986 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47 (2):311-327.
Risk, Rights, and Restitution.M. J. Zimmerman - 2006 - Philosophical Studies 128 (2):285-311.

Add more references